The site isn't loading for me, but I disagree with the title.
Context matters, but without it, yeah I definitely disagree with the title.
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
7 points (70.6% liked)
World News
32163 readers
730 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I have no real idea what much of that is trying to say but:
This new industrial age is also beginning to reverse some of the secular macro trends of the past. Fractured supply chains are raising global prices, causing inflation targets to overshoot and interest rates to rise. Public and private money is flooding into manufacturing projects, irrigating firms dehydrated by the investment drought. Higher investment plans are also helping absorb the global savings glut, with global real interest rates rising by over 1 percentage point so far.
This seems like a bit of jargon - what is a secular macro trend?
Anyway, I kind of agree that investment into manufacturing and competition on that is probably good for everyone.
A secular trend or market is one that is likely to continue moving in the same general direction for the foreseeable future. Secular trends are contrasted with cyclical trends, which are affected by the boom and bust swings of the market.
A space race type competition for green tech that mitigates climate change and provides clean energy is the optimal east v west path.
who comes up with this shit?
TLDR;
"Most arms races leave no one better off. Today's race to reindustrialise is different. It may be just the impetus the world needs to break free of its economic and environmental torpor."
Fascinating macro economic analysis, I must think about it..
This is the key part imo
The first centres on green technologies and industries, a race to decarbonise. China has stolen a march in technologies such as solar and battery manufacture. Latterly the west has stirred, led by the US Inflation Reduction Act’s blockbuster package of subsidies and incentives. The EU is now escalating its own efforts. With an extra investment of around 2-3 per cent of global gross domestic product per year in green technologies needed to hit net zero, this race has a distance to run.
These initiatives have drawn criticism on the grounds they amount to a subsidy race. But an arms race to invest in decarbonising technologies is in fact exactly what the world needs to tackle two global externalities — the climate crisis and the investment drought. The theory of the second best tells us that, faced with an externality, subsidies can help us achieve the best attainable outcome.
Well yes, I guess that would be the most "tangible " part of the article.
Imo the whole article, creates a context of opportunities, as if the world has started a new kind of green/ tech/ sustainable and re-industrialization " revolution ". As I perceive it, there were downsides to the old fashioned outsourcing, de-industrialisation, the unconditional (unbalanced) global trade system, etc. The new apparent geopolitical, climate, migration/population , and health crises, made existing cracks very visible, and brought us to the turningpoint we are at, or have already passed.
I can only speak from my own (limited) experience & worldview, ofcourse, but to me we have passed this "turningpoint" in Europe, and things have been dramatically changing in an accelerated pace these recent years. I'd like very much that this articles optimism and described scenarios will come to fruitation, and that the current developments will give us all, more and better opportunities.
On the other hand, too much competition, and more and too much wars, could equally prove devastating. I'd like to acceed to this article with carefull optimism, and or a more realistic "maybe".